Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
MSNBC
Dec 5, 2012 12:00pm PST
in cuts but half are to defense. this has $1.2 trillion in cuts but they're just saying make the whole thing cuts to entitlements in domestic spending and not cut defense at all? trying to entice the democrats saying, i don't want you to fall off this cliff so why don't you voluntarily jump off this steeper cliff but don't worry, your fall will be cushioned by lava. >> that is jon stewart's take on the gop's fiscal cliff offer. he's right. we are better off stumbling down the slope like drunken fools than the republican offer out there. here to explain that and why a huge part of the talks making major changes to medicare may be totally unnecessary is jonathan cohn and joins us now. jon, i think that's a good place to start is this. itรง seems like all of the discussions about medicare, in relation to the fiscal cliff or in general seems to have an ajumpgs a assumption it's a big program and in dire need for cutting and reform but there's a basic myth at work there of the efficiency of medicare. >> yeah. medicare is expensive. why are we going to have the big deficits? mostly because
MSNBC
Dec 7, 2012 12:00pm PST
. as widely expected they agreed to take up a challenge to the federal defense of marriage act, which is the federal law that says the federal government cannot recognize same-sex marriages even in the states where they're legal. but and i think this is the surprising part the justices also aagreed to take up a challenge to california's proposition 8, which could either be a very narrow decision about california only or the justices could take up the basic question about whether states can deny same sex couples the ability to get married. these cases won't be argued until probably march, but i think it's very surprising. this is a huge action by the supreme court today wading fully into the issue of same-sex marriage. so it's going to mean that this will be an absolute blockbuster term. >> pete, can you talk a little bit about what it means to take two cases in this way at the same time? we know from the aca decision that justice roberts cares deeply about his legacy and the legacy of the court. how do we read that into this discussion? is he going to want to be part of a decision str
MSNBC
Dec 10, 2012 12:00pm PST
in toronto after a 40-year relationship. edie got a federal estate tax bill for $363,000 because the defense of marriage act requires the federal government to treat edie and thee as strangers. if thea had been tom, it would have been zero. several lower courts found doma unconstitution and it was just a matter of train before edie and the freight train that is the movement woot encounter anthony, aka anthony kennedy. when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin of history. the courts other gay rights case comes from california which gave gays the right to marry and then with proposition 8 took it away. taking away an existing right because of an
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)